Help with Waternet bill | Free legal advice

Questioner

My girlfriend received a huge bill from Waternet based on an estimate for drinking water use over the period July 2007 to November 2010. She lived at the address in question from August 2005 to December 2009. In 2010 she moved and registered with Waternet for her new address and has been paying for drinking water use ever since to date. Waternet now states that it never paid for water use at its old address for the period in question (2007-2010). But apparently it did for the period prior to July 2007, since a bank statement was found for that period. According to Waternet, no invoices were drawn up because the meter reading was never submitted. Since it concerns a period far in the past, not all (possible) invoices and bank statements are available anymore, so it is difficult to check whether or not drinking water was paid for. The strange thing is that we were able to find a bank statement with a refund by Waternet on 29-6-2009 (so in the middle of the period in question) with the description 'too much paid for the supply of drinking water'. My impression is that Waternet's administration is incorrect and that the drinking water usage over that period was simply paid for. But how can that be proven? There are almost no invoices or statements to be found anymore. They rely on their computer system. The following points are in any case incorrect: - This concerns a period in which she was partly no longer resident at the address in question. This can be checked with the housing corporation as well as the Municipal Basic Administration, and not to forget, their own administration. - In the middle of the period in question, a refund was made by Waternet regarding the overpayment for drinking water use. This suggests that drinking water was indeed paid for. - My own experience is that Waternet makes a calculation based on an estimate in the absence of a reported meter reading. So it seems unlikely to me that no bill was made and/or sent for that period. Waternet is currently taking the position that my girlfriend has to prove otherwise. Does it make sense to counter this with the above arguments?

Lawyer

Dear questioner, In this case, the burden of proof is reversed now that Waternet is a company and must have its administration in order. It seems unlikely to me that no advances were paid. You yourself have found proof of that, the settlement.